Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Jun (if you are still following this thread),
250 posts so far on this thread, not bad. What is the record for most posts on one thread? I have another idea for a thread topic and I just want to gauge what I am up against.

My point is that these guys are not the only ones who see the value of internal skills and work hard to cultivate them. The three teachers I have the privilege of working with now have independently found merit in the ideas expressed in these discussions.

That's good, but let me tell you my perspective, just for the fun of it. Many hundreds of years ago (at least Tang Dynasty), even though a lot of the information was reserved for "those in the know", this basic stuff we're talking about was so well known that most styles had it. What they began to do was compete among each other and different styles began to develop their own versions of "the smartest way to do this stuff so that we get more power than the other guys."

Right now, most western version of Asian martial arts have been pretty blind (or at least highly limited) about this kind of movement skills. So we're having this surreal fist-fight among and with a lot of people about whether such a thing even exists or not.

That means that we're just watching the entre' to the final chapter, by any means. Wait until the discussion comes around to "the best way to do it".

I'm staking my position, BTW, on the idea that Ueshiba used the very soft approach as preferable. But that's just Aikido. The interesting part is what the other arts really should be doing and how this will all come together among all the Asian arts in the end. A really good indicator came, IMO, from Ushiro Sensei, who already sees the way it's all going and who has begun sharing some things with Aikido. That was a very positive step forward.

..is that his god, Cheng Man Ching, clearly differentiated between this form of strength and "li". If CMC was so wrong, why is Justin such a fanatic follower, hosting webpages in adulation of Cheng Man Ching? Weird, isn't it?

I think there's a clear non-religious reason why martial artists like CMC have info webpages and other people do not. It probably has to do with them having accomplishments and being one of the early taijiquan pioneers in the US and having great students.

But I'm still not sure (and you obviously aren't) why CMC or anyone else even enters in the discussion when you are directly asked questions. We're talking about your conception of 'internal' stuff, not Cheng's.

If you have a personal fued with Robert Smith or CMC, I suggest you write some articles or a book and present your theories to the martial arts community instead of discussion forum outbursts. It would be quite an interesting read, maybe.

But it would be even more interesting if a demonstration of the efficacy of the 'ground strength vector' in a full resistance/contact match would be videotaped for us all to see. Do any exist?

Last edited by statisticool : 12-24-2006 at 12:16 AM.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."

...is talking about will change your perspective once you get hands-on experience with the sort of internal connection and internal strength skill that Dan, and Mike Sigman, have labored in great detail to present here and on other forums.

I'm not saying actual skills don't exist. I'm saying what has been offered as what distinguishes them from regular ol' external skills is not convincing. That is, all explanations point to regular ol' external stuff.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."

I'm not saying actual skills don't exist. I'm saying what has been offered as what distinguishes them from regular ol' external skills is not convincing. That is, all explanations point to regular ol' external stuff.

Why did you start Aikido again? Were you out to learn something new, or did you just want to study it so you could talk about how it has nothing to do with ki but rather GOOD OLD NORMAL physics.

You seem to think Ki is really tough to describe, maybe some have a hard time, but jut pick up a copy of 'ki in daily life' or any of Koichi Tohei's other books, and I garuantee you'll have the clearest and most clear descriptions you can imagine.

I'm sorry that you're so anti-poetic, romantic, mystical, religious, or anything besides 'good ol' western materialism, but I would urge you to consider that this other 'stuff' is some of the most enriching aspects of life.

Wayne your mistake is assuming that Justin has set foot in an actual aikido dojo, I have yet to ascertain if he has even studied aikido, or any martial art for that matter other than reading it on the internet.

I referred him to my instructor, Jimmy Sorentino, who BTW is not a Dan Harden fan, I don't believe he has been by to train at all in our dojo in Arlington. You have to wonder about how open minded someone is that won't even seek to understand in the physical sense of experience.

Asperger's Syndrome is a neurological disorder that is often described as a milder variant of autistic disorder, and both conditions are grouped under the broad diagnostic category of autistic spectrum disorders, or pervasive developmental disorders. Pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) are marked by significant impairment in several areas of development, especially those involving social interaction, language development, and communication skills. The trait most characteristic of Asperger's, though it is not present in all cases of the syndrome, is a pedantic, monotonic speech pattern, usually focused on a particularly narrow area of interest.

Jun (if you are still following this thread),
250 posts so far on this thread, not bad. What is the record for most posts on one thread? I have another idea for a thread topic and I just want to gauge what I am up against.

Mark J.

Alot more than 250, over a 1000 and you start to get near the longer threads

I cannot help it if some internal theorists' explanations of what they believe distinguishes internal from external is not convincing.

Quote:

I'm sorry that you're so anti-poetic, romantic, mystical, religious, or anything besides 'good ol' western materialism, but I would urge you to consider that this other 'stuff' is some of the most enriching aspects of life.

So much for attack the argument not the person.

So what, specifically, from that book do you feel cannot be explained without resorting to mysticism?

Kevin, I'm still wondering how you are measuring ones' understanding of ki. If you just say 'by demonstration, come visit', I'm then wondering why it wouldn't be demonstrating just regular old physics, mechanics, efficient body movement, timing, and the like.

Michael, you said

Quote:

One of the things I can do, none of us can fully explain, but it's something I was taught how to do and I essentially only follow the mechanics to get there.

Can you share this baffling skill with us? Just what is it (maybe post a video- it has to be shown, right?), and who, specifically, are these people that cannot fully explain it? Can you share their names? Perhaps some of us around here can fully explain it. I'm sure you do want to figure it out.

And demonstrations of the efficacy of the 'ground strength vector' theory in a full resistance/contact match, videotaped. Do any exist?

Oops, more questions. I'll have to work on that.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."

BTW, Justin...what skills exactly do you want demonstrated and in what scenario or rules, constraints do you want to employ to isolate the conditions in which one would interact with you?

I thought my questions have been pretty clear already.

-I'm looking for clear reasoning that distinguishes what some call 'internal' from 'external' without their reasoning amounting to talking about 'external' in other (typically ill-defined, subjective, unmeasurable, or undistinguishable from 'external') terms.

-Video of someone using the 'ground strength vector' sparring effectively with high levels of contact and resistance, with explanation of how it differs from regular ol' sparring.

-Clear explanation why Internal = Extermal + Something. What is that something else? Can it be objectively measured?

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."

You have to wonder about how open minded someone is that won't even seek to understand in the physical sense of experience.

Of course, the logical mistake you're making is trying to make this about my martial skill or lack of, which was never a relevant issue since I am asking questions of internal theorists' claims. Plus I've already mentioned I've done such things qith dojos and invididual (though not with the dojo you recommended, although I did watch there) and in each case came away thinking that there is something there that is very nice but just regular ol external in the end.

So why not therefore just attempt to focus on the questions that I am asking about internal theorists' claims and provide answers to the questions?

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."

No, I was thinking of Justin's pal Stephen J. Goodson and Justin himself. Goodson is a member of the DC Area Skeptics and he talks and reasons just like Justine does. Constant "Skeptics" like Goodson and Smith are notoriously comprised of more than their share of Apergers types.

Generally, the people who post, regardless of all the answers and previous lengthy discussions (as Justin does), the same questions over and over, in the same negative connotations, are the "Skeptics" who actually are evincing a personality disorder. A quick look at Justin's posts, for example, would show that we're not dealing with someone who wants answers, but someone with a perpetual grudge and a fixation. I think we should recognize that sort of person is not there to reason and just shut them out of the discussion. He ignores all invitations to "go see", so it's pretty obvious that he really doesn't want to know... he wants to hear his own narrow views parrotted back at him.

-I'm looking for clear reasoning that distinguishes what some call 'internal' from 'external' without their reasoning amounting to talking about 'external' in other (typically ill-defined, subjective, unmeasurable, or undistinguishable from 'external') terms.

-Video of someone using the 'ground strength vector' sparring effectively with high levels of contact and resistance, with explanation of how it differs from regular ol' sparring.

-Clear explanation why Internal = Extermal + Something. What is that something else? Can it be objectively measured?

I've actually answered this question more than a few times on the forum. You don't really want the answer, you just want to argue and attempt to disparage. Frankly, I post some fairly clear descriptions knowing full well that most people will gloss over them and that's as it should be. The people who want to know will search for information everywhere and wouldn't spend so many hours of their day trying to play 'gotcha' with "Walter Sigman" and other completely aberrant games.

For you to be so fanatically devoted to Cheng Man Ching that you host webpages for him and yet you don't know what jin is... that's actually hilarious. And I'd like for you to stay that way. It's Karma at its best. And as I said... CMC attempted to explain what jin was, so why not see if you can figure out what he meant? Maybe you can write letters demanding to see CMC in some match with an MMA fighter to prove that his stuff was any good or that jin has value?

But why don't you ask the same questions on the Cheng Man Ching list, BTW? I'm told that you don't seem to have that same curiosity on that list.... a list which people are reportedly leaving rapidly because too many nuts have gotten on it.

Jimmy, hopefully I did not insinuate that you'd have anything but an open mind! Good to see you are out there!

Looks like I am moving back to DC area here this spring, they want me back at the building! I am looking for houses in the Barcroft area, so should be close by the dojo! Cannot wait to start training again on a regular basis!

I too am a skeptic, BTW, of much of this, and especially of those that tend to say "I know something that you don't", that said, it is quite possible, and I am of the school too, "prove it to me". I think that is a very healthy attitude to have.

I do however, stop short (i hope I do at least), of saying emphatically that some one is wrong or cannot do it, simply because of my lack of ability to conceive or because I have a simplistic, reductionist view of how things work.

I don't need to travel around the world to realize that it is somewhat round and not flat as was thought of (I guess some people still believe that too though!).

Of course, the logical mistake you're making is trying to make this about my martial skill or lack of, which was never a relevant issue since I am asking questions of internal theorists' claims. Plus I've already mentioned I've done such things qith dojos and invididual (though not with the dojo you recommended, although I did watch there) and in each case came away thinking that there is something there that is very nice but just regular ol external in the end.

So what good would a video do. You admit that you were able to watch a class and determine that what was going on could be explained as external.

I think the big mistake you make is taking a dualistic western view of the world. Every thing to you is black and white....can be explained in terms of positive/negative, good/bad, right/wrong.

I don't really think you can split things into internal and external exclusively, these are simple words that help us reduce complicate things into manageable concepts.

I really don't understand internal and what it is as compared to....what???? what is internal? everyone talks about it, but can't explain.

I can start a technique from a thought or a perception, I suppose this is internal...the action I take is of course external! So for every phenomena that you observe, you will reduce it to, "yeah, whatever, that is just plain ole physics!"

Don't believe a bunch of cranky old martial artist.

Many of the brightest minds in science have reached conclusions that things are much more complicated in the world than we think.

How about there are no absolutes.. Quantum phyiscist have reached that conclusion. Vibrational energy does exsist at the sub atomic level, the changes in vibrations affect the overall structure of things. Wow, that sounds very familar to me. This are not tai chi dudes, but scientist!

I'd recommend several things:

The Quantum and the Lotus ISBN 0-609-60854-1
The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene ISBN 0-375-72720-5
A decent video, albeit somewhat skeptical and suspect, but makes you think, "What the Bleep to we know?"

Also, on a simplier level. If we sparred NHB, and I was able to beat you by simply laying on you and moving gently and not even get out of breath....while you are gasping for air and using all your might to keep me from submitting you...what do you call that?

I use the skills of kokyu, timing, breathing, and all that stuff....while you'd be using simply physical strength. Is it mystical? No, is it external...most certainly....but can it also be internal? Absolutely. It all starts with a mindset, a thought, a perception, and an action based on an interpretation of the things around me.

Here is a good quote from The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene page 4-5.

"But, you might ask, what of it? Surely any sober assessment would conclude that although we might not understand everything about the universe-every aspect of how matter behaves or life functions-we are privy to the defining, broad-brush strokes gracing natures canvas. Surely as Camus intimated, progress in physics, such as understanding the number of space dimensions; or progress in physics, such as understanding all the organizational structures in the brain'or, for that matter progress in any number of other scientific undertakings may fill in important details, but their impact on our evaluaton of life and reality would be minimal. Surely, reality is what we think it is; reality is revealed to us by our experiences.

To one extent or another, this view of reality is one of many of us hold, if only implicitly......it's easy to be seduced by the face nature reveals directly to our senses. Yet in the decades since Camus' text, I've learned that modern science tells a different story. The overarching lesson that has emerged from scientific inquiry over the last century is that human experience is often a misleading guide to the true nature of reality. Lying just beneath the surface of the everyday is a world we'd hardly recognize."

I do believe it is possible that there are those out there in the past and present that have broken into new paradigms and have figured out how to tap into these subtle differences and can help us better perceive these things.

It is not about internal or external as the two cannot be separated, but about opening your mind and youself to listening to something new.

Justin wrote:
I use the skills of kokyu, timing, breathing, and all that stuff....while you'd be using simply physical strength. Is it mystical? No, is it external...most certainly....but can it also be internal? Absolutely. It all starts with a mindset, a thought, a perception, and an action based on an interpretation of the things around me.

Simple, "regular old physics":

Light is a wave AND a particle.

...

...

mind blows

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer

No, I was thinking of Justin's pal Stephen J. Goodson and Justin himself. Goodson is a member of the DC Area Skeptics and he talks and reasons just like Justine does. Constant "Skeptics" like Goodson and Smith are notoriously comprised of more than their share of Apergers types.

suggest you take your personal fued up with Goodson. Perhaps publish and article for the MA community to critique instead of internet ramblings?

Quote:

I think we should recognize that sort of person is not there to reason and just shut them out of the discussion.

I'm wondering what the best example of 'internal' as offered by the internal theorists is. Surely there is some video? I'd think there would be given that there are a lot of videos of what people call external.

Quote:

what is internal? everyone talks about it, but can't explain.

People have/had magainzes named internal strength and go on at length about it. I'd think they'd be able to educate us.

Quote:

The Quantum and the Lotus ISBN 0-609-60854-1
The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene ISBN 0-375-72720-5
A decent video, albeit somewhat skeptical and suspect, but makes you think, "What the Bleep to we know?"

I've done the last two, I'll check out the first. Thanks.

Quote:

Also, on a simplier level. If we sparred NHB, and I was able to beat you by simply laying on you and moving gently and not even get out of breath....while you are gasping for air and using all your might to keep me from submitting you...what do you call that?

If you were to beat a person in that manner, an observer would probably says you used muscle, momentum, and friction. Are you putting that forth as an example of 'internal strength'? What distinguishes it from efficient use of ol external stuff?

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."